United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.
Plaintiff Jon Feingersh Photography, Inc. (“JFPI”) brings this action against Defendant Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Co. (“HMH”) for Defendant’s use of certain stock photographs belonging to JFPI. JFPI entered into certain stock photo licensing agreements with HMH, which gave HMH limited licenses to use certain photographs in its educational publications. (Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 16.)
JFPI used a company called Corbis as its agent and provided Corbis with the right to license JFPI’s images. Corbis then sold certain licenses to HMH. The Corbis-HMH licensing agreement contains the following language:
Choice of Law / Jurisdiction / Attorney’s Fees: Any dispute regarding this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York and Titles 15, 17, and 35 of the U.S.C., as amended, and the parties agree to accept the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in New York, USA, regardless of conflict of laws.
(Doc. No. 1, Ex. 1-2 at 5.)
On May 1, 2013, Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this Court asserting two counts: (1) Copyright Infringement (Count I); and (2) Breach of Contract (Count II). (Doc. No. 1 at ¶¶ 34-42.) On June 11, 2013, Defendant moved to dismiss the Complaint, asserting that this case is improperly venued in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania because the forum selection clause is enforceable. (Doc. No. 9 at 3-4.) In the alternative, Defendant seeks the transfer of this case to a New York court.
Plaintiff argues to the contrary, contending that the copyright infringement claims are not subject to the forum selection clause. Plaintiff asserts that even if the Court determines that the forum selection provisions should be strictly enforced, only transfer of the breach of contract claim is warranted. (Doc. No. 13 at 2.)
For reasons that follow, the Court will direct the Clerk of Court to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Because of the transfer, the Court will withhold ruling on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.
JFPI is a stock photography agency that licenses photographs for distribution throughout the United States. (Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 2.) HMH is a publishing company that uses photographs in its educational textbooks and other publications. (Id. at ¶ 3.)
JFPI authorized The Stock Market Photo Agency of New York, Inc. (“TSM”) and Zefa, two stock photo licensing agencies, to issue limited licenses for use of its images by third parties, in exchange for licensing fees. (Id. at ¶¶ 8, 10.) Corbis subsequently acquired TSM and Zefa, along with the right to license JFPI’s images. Pursuant to the licensing agreements, Corbis, as JFPI’s agent, sold HMH limited licenses to use copies of certain JFPI photographs in numerous educational publications between 1996 and 2008. (Id. at ¶ 16.) HMH paid Corbis and its predecessors for those licenses, and they in turn paid proportional commissions to JFPI.
As noted previously, the Corbis-HMH licensing agreement contains the following language:
Choice of Law / Jurisdiction / Attorney’s Fees: Any dispute regarding this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York and Titles 15, 17, and 35 of the U.S.C., as amended, and the parties agree to accept the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and ...